[VIHUELA] Re: Baroque guitar, where to start?
I don't think he ever did (the music just doesn't go lower than the open A string) but I suppose there is a presumption that it was most likely for a 5-string (i.e. single strung) guitar. 5-string guitars did certainly exist at the time. Also, some original 5-course guitars were converted to 5-string ones by changing their original bridges. Alexander PS: If I remember it correctly there are also a few arrangements of his music for the seven string Russian guitar (supposedly from his period in Russia between 1804 - 14). On 03/02/2011 15:49, Monica Hall wrote: [Eugene C. Braig IV] Indeed, at least relatively speaking. However, the 6-course instrument was largely a quirk of Spanish-speaking places. The rest of Europe seems to have gone to five single strings first (using the low octave at d and A, and probably often simply leaving their 5-course guitars single strung), then later adding the sixth at E. A fine example of 5-string guitar music and on of the earliest known concerti for guitar is Lhoyer's, published in Germany in the very early 19th c. Best, Eugene That's very interesting. Does Lloyer actually specify that his music is for a single strung 5-course guitar? Monica To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Baroque guitar, where to start?
They've been around in Russia too. There are two original 19th century 5-string bandurkas in the St-Petersburg collection; shallow-bodied, fairly small in size (the one on your link looks like a re-construction to me). By the way, I've never heard about 5-course bandurkas ... Also, I'm not sure they are in any way related (i.e. music wise) to the guitar tradition. Alexander On 03/02/2011 18:04, Roman Turovsky wrote: 5 course/string guitars survived into the 19th century in Ukraine: http://polyhymnion.org/images/bandurka.jpg ! RT To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: More CD/ early guitar songs
Lucky you, I'm still hunting for this one for some time ... Well, virtually every CD where Maria Christina Kiehr is featured is worth having, just for the pure magic of her voice! It's a shame though that the accompanying / participant musicians (including singers!) on some of those CDs often fail to do justice to her voice. Did you get it on Amazon? Alexander On 28/01/2011 09:58, Martyn Hodgson wrote: Sorry, how silly of me not to give the details: AIRS DE COUR Etienne Moulinie (extraites des cinq livres) Maria Cristina Kiehr - sop Akain Aubin - contre tenor John Elwes - tenor Josef Cabre - basse Bernard Revel - luth et guitare baroque Harmonia mundi s.a ED13010 rgds M To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Any b-guitar repertoire in all re-entrant accepted by all?
Well, this is not quite correct. The original string length of surviving guitars by Rene / Alexandre / Jean Voboam would be somewhere between 69 - 71 cm. Most of them were converted to shorter string lengths (sometime between 1730 - early 19th century) by shortening of the neck and / or moving the bridge towards the sound hole or both. There are a few surviving French guitars, shortly preceding the Voboam's generation (Dumesnil for example), with 66 - 67cm SL but certainly not less than that. The sting length of most surviving Italian-made guitars in the period between 1630 - 1670 is even longer, at c. 71 - 73 cm. Again, there is a shorter SL category here too (64 - 66 cm), to which, as it seems, both the Koch (currently 64cm) and Tessler guitars belong (Tesler certainly had its neck being shortened, Koch very likely too). SL seems to begin to drop from early 18th century on (when it hardly exceeds 64 - 65 cm), quite possibly because of the increasing use of wound strings. I quite agree with Martyn that the use of an octave on the third course is a bit of an overkill with all-gut stringing, whatever SL is there. And lets not forget that the main purpose of octave stringing in olden times was to enhance the sound of dull-sounding thick gut strings, which would be hardly necessary on under 1.0 mm thick third course. Alexander On 23/11/2010 14:04, jean-michel Catherinot wrote: 1/ Is 69 cm an usual diapason for early (around 1650) guitar: Koch is 61 cm or so, first generation of Voboam rather 65, Tessler is short too. Longer diapason is more common on later guitars or guitar `a la capucine, with a deeper body (lower tuning?) .. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Bartolotti Videos performed by Lex Eisenhardt
OK, I'm glad we agree on this. Alexander On 24/08/2010 21:44, Monica Hall wrote: It's not my rationale! I prefer the msuic without the bourdon on the 5th course. I've just been listening to the same suite on the CD which Lex made in 1994 - with the French tuning. Much better in every way. Monica To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: some 19th century seven-string guitar pieces
Well, the botanical name for Ukrainian 'Явір' (the way it appears in the song title) is 'Acer pseudoplatanus' which is the same that is used to define 'Sycamore' or 'Sycamore Maple'. Acer pseudoplatanus is native both to central Europe (including Ukraine) and West Asia. So I suppose either of the two words (without getting excessively botanical :)) would be fine for this song title. I personally prefer Sycamore. AB On 18/04/2010 16:34, Roman Turovsky wrote: 2) There stays a sycamore tree over the water European Maple rather. Sycamore is an Asia Minor variety. RT To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: some 19th century seven-string guitar pieces
I suppose it all depends on who compiled your dictionary :) Good of you to mention Yavor Genov, he's brilliant. One of a few perhaps who plays Dowland with the correct technique (i.e. without resorting to thumb-under) and it just sounds right! AB On 18/04/2010 17:55, Roman Turovsky wrote: My dictionary has maple as European, sycamore as Asian, and planetree as American.. WHichever it is - the tree in question has a large symbolic value, and there is even one Yavor Genov, a young Bulgarian lute-player! RT To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: 2 short pieces for seven-string guitar in G
Sounds fine to me. I think you just wanted to be true to their markedly melancholic nature (the first piece in particular), didn't you, Stuart ;) Very nicely played, by the way, and with reminiscent scenery ... You should do some more. Alexander PS: You can send me the title of the second one and I'll translate it for you. Stuart Walsh wrote: Thanks for having a listen. I put up two pieces and they both sound OK to me - in the sense that the sound doesn't keep fading away. The first piece is quite odd in having clearly notated rests: it looks like you should really pause and not let the notes ring on. So maybe the sound wasn't fading but it was just the pauses! Some of this Russian stuff is extremely meticulously notated but maybe I was taking the notation too literally. And, perhaps we just need one lutelist. Stuart To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitarre theorbe
I'm not sure if there are such illustrations that show the actual head and neck of a chitarra atiorbata in the Stradivari museum. To my knowledge, the most comprehensive information about paper templates and patterns that are relevant to Stradivari guitars are found in the article Antonio Stradivari and baroque guitar making by Stewart Pollens (in The Cambridge companion to the guitar). Stewart Pollens recons that if one applies similar proportions / ratios that are found indicated on some Stradivari guitar templates to the chitarra tiorbata then it would have 67.4 - 73.1 cm for fingerboard strings and 1595 - 1653 for diapasons. It's an article worth reading. Alexander - Original Message - From: Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk To: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 7:28 AM Subject: [VIHUELA] Guitarre theorbe I have one more question - about the drawing of a chitarra atiorbata in the Stradivarius Museum. According to the sources I have consulted this shows the head and neck of the instrument, but not the body. Is that correct? Monica To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitarre theorbe
Just a short clarification to my previous posting. The paper template for the extended neck measures 921.5 mm x 53 mm. So it is quite long! Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitarre theorbe
You should read it again ;) AB - Original Message - From: Martyn Hodgson hodgsonmar...@yahoo.co.uk To: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu; Alexander Batov alexander.ba...@vihuelademano.com Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 2:35 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Guitarre theorbe Yes I read Stewart Pollens' paper but am also pretty sure the Strad patterns give no information about the theorboed extension so the c. 160cm for the open basses is Stewart Pollens' own guess (based, I'd suggest, on the octave low disposition of the basses and similar theorbo/archlute relationships currently being discussed rather than the relatively shorter basses (c 90/100?). Mh. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitarre theorbe
I know what you mean but, in a way, it doesn't really matter what SHAPE the body is! From acoustical point of view an average baroque guitar and / or lute body is more than sufficient to support the lower (down from the 5th course bourdon) tuning of extended strings. It's the body's volume that matters here, not its shape! As for the length of the extended strings, I'd say even 90 - 100 cm would be enough to get a reasonably good balance of treble and bass registers (I'm telling this from my personal experience by the way, not just speculation). c.160 cm would certainly make the life easier simply because one can utilise thinner strings; and that's what is suggested (the way I see it anyway) on the templates. What would be really unlikely is for the extended strings of this sort of length to be tuned to the higher octaves (I mean in the way you were suggesting in your transcriptions). And I don't actually find any contradictions in placing bass and treble parts so far apart, i.e. as with the low octave tuning. There is plenty of repertoire (down from Piccinini's for a 14-course archlute to a 13-course Weiss) using virtually identical tessitura. Whether the names like 'citara / chitara tiorbata' (in the context of those Stradivari templates) can mean a sort of Grammatica-like instrument or not is totally separate issue altogether. For the time being, it's more a question of speculation, isn't it. They may even be called like that, for example, independently of the body type. And again, in the light of the present discussion it does not matter whether it's a lute- or guitar-shaped body, as far as one can play the same sort of music either on one or another. And the last point. Pollens may not be that informed which particular guitar book was copied or, indeed, plagiarized from another author but I can't really fail him (apart from a few relatively minor issues) where the actual organological analysis of Stradivari guitars, templates and other related information is concerned. He's done a pretty good job there, even just by gathering all the factual information on the Stradivari guitars in one place, surely worth of many purely speculative discussions. Alexander PS: I'm not sure what you mean by comparing the measurements with your own guitar? Which particular measurements do you find curious? It may depend on your guitar in the first place anyway, not the measurements derived from Stradivari's templates ... just an idea. Monica Hall wrote: I just read the article again... The one crucial thing which it doesn't seem to mention is the shape of the body. Everyone is assuming that it had a guitar-shaped figure of 8 body. But it may have been lute shaped. There is the Grammatica painting of a theorbo with 5 fingerboard courses and other music for the instrument e.g. Robert Spencers ms. of music for the chitarrone francese by Fontanelli. Another thing - do the gauges of the strings give any indication of the actual pitch? Monica And Stradivarius apparently made lutes and mandolins as well. I compared the measurements with my own guitar - and it seems this chitarra was a rather curiosu instrument. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Guitarre theorbee
I haven't seen the book but it's very likely to be this one: http://tinyurl.com/mu2pcu If the link won't work, search http://tinyurl.com/fnorz (first by clicking on Instruments et oevres d'art) for E.980.2.296 Anyway, there is little hope for the book as old as that to bring any 'sensational' breakthrough illustrations. For the time being, I'm afraid, we are stuck with just two (i.e. Granata, Rabel). Alexander Monica Hall wrote: I see that Donald Gill says that there is a drawing of the neck and pegbox of a late example of a theorboed guitar in the G. Thibault collection reproduced in a book by A. Berners Preservation and resoration of musical instruments. Has anyone seen this? It's in the BL but I can't get there this week. Martyn? Monica To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Image of chitarra atiorbata
That may well indeed be the case although we'd never know what was in the mind of the engraver. At least it gives an idea and that's the main thing! It's not the only known representation of theorboed guitar though, as it says on the page. The other one that came up recently (being kindly brought to our attention by Jean-Marie Poirier) dates from at least not later than 1626: http://tinyurl.com/o9hkjv Or see here for a full story: http://tinyurl.com/qcdpvd Note that the 'main' neck is noticeably wider than on 'normal' guitars: http://tinyurl.com/qax3c5 Also worth to compare with http://tinyurl.com/o68bdq for a similar idea of the extended neck construction, this time on lutes. Alexander - Original Message - From: Monica Hall mjlh...@tiscali.co.uk To: Stuart Walsh s.wa...@ntlworld.com Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 9:39 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Image of chitarra atiorbata But then the theorbo is the wrong way round. Someone else has suggested that the instruments are arranged like that deliberately to complement one another. Monica To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: New guitar construction history book
There are some nice pictures but don't expect much of the text ;) And you are right, it's certainly hugely overpriced for what it gives ... If I were you I'd better persuaded your library to get a really gorgeous guitar catalogue of the recent guitar exhibition The guitar: Four Centuries of Masterpieces in Alessandria instead (some rarely seen guitars, reasonably well-thought-of text, references etc, all in good balance): http://ilsalabue.com/lang1/la_chitarra.html .. Or, indeed, both. Alexander EUGENE BRAIG IV wrote: I've not seen this text in person, but am trying to persuade the music library at the university where I work that they NEED this on their shelves. Sinier de Ridder's shop tends to be expensive in all things, instruments included. Best, Eugene To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: New guitar construction history book
Totally agree, I'm just fortunate that I can borrow both from a friend of mine. Alexander PS: You don't really need such books, Rob, but instruments ;) Rob MacKillop wrote: Both books are very expensive. I'll just buy new strings instead... Rob To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] More on the Dias vihuela
My long promised update for one of the pages dedicated to the Dias vihuela: [1]http://www.vihuelademano.com/vgcrossroads.htm It's not a sort of 'must read' for everyone (i.e. rather technical) but might be interesting for makers and those who are curious what linen strips are doing inside musical instrument's body ;) Roger Blumberg certainly did but I'm not sure if he's still on the list. Alexander -- References 1. http://www.vihuelademano.com/vgcrossroads.htm To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: More on the Dias vihuela
Thank you, Martyn. I was actually thinking about the FoMRHI too (I have received the latest 'resurrected' bulletin another day). The biggest problem with the FoMRHI format though is that the images will be rendered rather poorly (as they have always been in previous publications) but they are what my article relies upon to a great extend. However, we could well do with discussion of some finer points that are raised in the article on the FoMRHI's pages, if there is, of course, some interest in this. Best wishes, Alexander Martyn Hodgson wrote: Dear Alexander, A very comprehensive paper and some super pics - thank you. Perhaps you might consider having it published in the newly resurrected FomRHI Quartetly? Contact the FoMRHI Sec Chris Goodwin. regards, Martyn To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Double headed 12c/loaded/Demi-filé
OK, you are the master, you know best. Perhaps you also declare as mere nonsense the very material fact that Mimmo is actually able to make loaded strings? I myself tried his latest batch (those that he recently developed) at the Greenwich festival last year and they were really good sounding strings, and not only in my opinion. Or maybe that was a dream ..? To me I see no difference whether it is to do with heavy salts or fine metal powders that get integrated into the fibre structure of the gut. And, as you may well understand, I'm not talking about any kind of chemical bond with the gut molecules as such here (neither was I in the previous posting)! Whether gut loading process was indeed part of historical practice is totally different matter altogether and unless there is proper historical evidence in support ... we are all talking nonsense really. Alexander PS: Sorry if this turns out as double posting. It doesn't seem that the lute list is working ... or is it just me? - Original Message - From: damian dlugolecki [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 4:44 AM Subject: [LUTE] Re: [LUTE] Re: [LUTE] Re: Double headed 12c/loaded/ Demi-filé No, no, no. This is complete and utter nonsense without any factual basis. I am sorry to be so blunt, but I will not accomodate this kind of fantasy science. DD To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] two vihuelas
My latest vihuela projects: http://www.vihuelademano.com/vihuelas/pages/flutedback-vihuela-inAG.htm http://www.vihuelademano.com/vihuelas/pages/flutedback-vihuela-inE.htm --- Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: two-bridge viol/vihuela
- Original Message - From: Rob MacKillop [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Vihuela vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 8:22 AM Subject: [VIHUELA] two-bridge viol/vihuela I was talking to a viol maker yesterday and in passing mentioned the illustrations of viols with two bridges, one flat for da mano, one curved for d'arco - I'm sure we discussed that here but can't find it in the archive. Can anyone point me to such images? Rob MacKillop Rob, below is what I've posted on the subject last year (by the way the article is still accessible): - Original Message - From: Alexander Batov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 2:30 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] More on T.Viti's viol bridge Turning back to the earlier discussion on this subject, there is a fairly good quality illustration of the Timoteo Viti's viol painting in the following article (scroll down to the bottom of page 8): http://articles.instrumentsmedievaux.org/raultmodif.pdf .. which, in a way, puts to rest some speculations that were proposed earlier about the depicted viol's bridge possible ways of construction (i. e. two-bridge plucked / bowed idea, as well one of the bridge's extended foot going through the cut-out in the soundboard and resting on the back). In fact, there is just one single bowed bridge! Painter's tricks with the perspective distortions are to blame, I suppose .. --- Alexander Batov To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: jungga (2)
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 15:04:13 -0800 bill kilpatrick wrote: i can't see how an antique design like the jungga 2 (a rectangle inserted into a circle) could come from anywhere other than europe. I can't see either but only as antique as a bold sketch of a modern guitar shape could be (not sure what you mean by a rectangle inserted into a circle, please explain). seeing that the jungga 1 is a boat shaped lute - in keeping with many of the indigenous, southeast asian designs for plucky instruments - the 2 stands apart as something unique. Jungga1 is a totally different story and shouldn't be really mixed with what came much later. Junga2 most probably serves the same purpose in music making nowadays as jungga1 did for the last four - five centuries or so and hence similarity in its name. For example, think of a similar situation with arrival of European violin (held against the player's knee, not the shoulder) to the Middle East and its gradual replacement, from about 1950s or so, of the traditional rabab and kemençe in classical ensembles of Turkish, Iranian and Arab music (I mean classical in their own way, not as in European classical music). my knowledge of indonesian history - as it relates to europe - is sketchy at best but i would have thought it more than probable that a design of european - no doubt iberian - orign (like that of the rectangle and circle) would have been in circulation in the area way before the 20th cent.. It would be too simplistic to ascribe too much influence here on behalf of, as you say, European and Iberian origin; well, unless you know the facts .. i'm sure you're familiar with these early charango designs (imported from europe, i would suggest) but for the purposes of illustration, here they are: ... I can't open this link I'm afraid. was the jungga 2 design found anywhere in europe in the 20th cent.? ... would it have been brought to indonesia in sufficent numbers to influence local instrument design? And why should I think only of charango connection here ...? To conclude, I put it as early 20th century, in fact I think it could have happened quite a bit later, 1950 - 60s. --- Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: jungga (2)
interesting reference for stringed instruments here: http://www.atlasofpluckedinstruments.com/se_asia.htm .. of particular note is the jungga - two of which are pictured; the second showing distinct, medieval european design, similar to one of the early charango/citole-like shapes. another interesting item on the page is a philippine kitara - which - according to the accompaning photo caption - should be ... played like the player thinks it should be played. It is mostly likely that both of them are fairly recent new-comers to those countries, not earlier than early 20th century I'd guess. Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: BG stringing
- Original Message - From: Monica Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2007 2:13 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: BG stringing .. The bit about the Italian manuscript F:Pn.Res.Vmc ms. 59, fol. 108v is at the end of the section on Italy although it doesn't appear in the list on the Front Page. What does the pen drawing of a guitar look like on the fol. 2v of this MS (you've got a photocopy of it)? I'm particularly interested in the number of pegs if they are at all shown and / or distinguishable. The Res. Vmf.35 has a lovely pen drawing of a vaulted-back guitar with 9 pegs, so I'm just curious ... Also, did you have a chance to see Millioni's 1636 edition (Res. Vmf. 44) which is supposed to contain alfabeto for a 4-string / course Italian chitarrino (ghitarra italiana)? Just wondering if it's got any indications for its stringing. Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Eloy's photos
I wonder how did you do that? I tried to search in the way Eloy has suggested earlier: I followed Bill's advice and uploaded the mexican instruments pictures to http://www.flickr.com Where you can see them under my name, Eloy Cruz .. but no instrument pictures come up; searching by tags is equally disappointing. --- Alexander - Original Message - From: Monica Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Vihuelalist vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 5:30 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Eloy's photos I have at last been able to access Eloy's photos. They are brilliant especially the citara. What is the date of them? Monica To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Flat-back vihuela
Thank you, Stewart. --- AB - Original Message - From: Stewart McCoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Vihuela List vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 3:53 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Flat-back vihuela Having had the pleasure of playing this instrument a few days ago, I can confirm that it is exceptionally fine. It is beautifully made in every detail, and it is very playable. There is a warmth and depth to the tone, and the sound is remarkably strong for so small an instrument. There is a fast response which helps with ornaments, and invites expressive playing. Congratulations to Alexander. Best wishes, Stewart McCoy. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: G. dai Libri viola da mano
- Original Message - From: Stuart Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Alexander Batov [EMAIL PROTECTED]; vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007 9:48 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: G. dai Libri viola da mano Looks lovely. I'm afraid I can't afford one! :)) Is the neck on your instrument a bit longer than the one in the painting? And what pitch is the first course? One can never be totally precise when making reproductions from a painting like this; besides, as the length of the neck is concerned, that wasn't my aim either. The neck length on my viola was chosen to be sufficient for tying on 9 frets (with a possibility for an extra 10th fret, if desired). This should be sufficient for most of the music by, say, F da Milano and the like. The string length is 58cm and I tune it to G (a' 440). Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] More to Valencia frescos story
I wonder if anybody from the Spanish participants of this list knows more of this story and / or can give an update for this rather ambitious initiative? http://www.frescosdelacatedral.com/noticias_desarrollo.php?id=468idcat=311 Along the same route, I've just discovered that it's possible, by getting on a virtual tour of the Valencia cathedral's Capella Major, to get a glimpse of the whole fresco fragment of an angel playing viola da mano (well, just about ...): http://www.frescosdelacatedral.com/index.php --- AB To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: G. dai Libri viola da mano
- Original Message - From: Roger E. Blumberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Alexander Batov [EMAIL PROTECTED]; vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007 11:16 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: G. dai Libri viola da mano Very nice. Beautiful. Thank you, Roger. So how does it sound? I assume it's a little smaller bodied than your other (or most other) more typical modern vihuela reproductions. Does this design/shape/size sound a little brighter, have even more punch and projection? How's the bass response? I'm not sure if it's any good idea for a maker to describe the sound of his instruments ... but I'm really pleased with it. Your proposed description (above) suits rather well! From my experience, I never found the bass response an issue with this type of instruments, neither with a (relatively) large or small body size. The overall sound balance is the king! I hope to add more reflections on the surrounding constructional matters to the page in the near future. Well life is, as always, hectic. ... Could you perhaps include a picture of it placed next to something else that would give viewers a better sense of it's true scale? OK, I'll think about it ... perhaps against my five and a half year old son .. :)) Anyway, string L 58cm, overall L 83.5cm (Alexander, I think a deeper, darker, richer, background color would do it more justice -- if you feel like shooting it again.) I always thought that 'cooler' background colour is better for, predominately, 'warmer' tones of wood but perhaps I should give it a try in the way you suggest. Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: pod
There is also this very sensible performance of Robert de Visee's allemande in A. I'd wish he played the whole suite! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uz87wCk4tfwmode=relatedsearch - Original Message - From: Doc Rossi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Vihuela List vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 9:39 AM Subject: [VIHUELA] pod a couple of new pod videos uploaded on you tube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCAJpL3XMMwmode=relatedsearch -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Spanish one-man bands
On Wednesday, December 13, 2006 10:50 PM Eloy Cruz wrote: ... Back in 2003 I asked everyone about more music or more surviving Spanish citterns or paintings and I could find nothing ... Citterns are mentioned (even with detailing of materials they are made of etc) in a number of late-16th century Spanish accounts which J. Romanillos published in his latest book The Vihuela da Mano and the Spanish Guitars (2002). Can provide a list if desired ... There is also this: http://www.cittern.theaterofmusic.com/art/anjo.html from Andrew Hartig's Cittern Picture Gallery which can also be a fairly close approximation to what the cittern looked like in the contemporary Spain. One particular detail of this instrument seems rather remarkable to me: the way the strings are fastened at the bottom edge of the soundboard - a feature somewhat similar to modern Portuguese violas where strings are pinned to what looks like a 'normal' bridge and then pass over a movable saddle-like thing in front of it. Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Viola da mano on the Valencia Cathedral fresco
As an update to the earlier thread on this topic. Primarily to Roger, et all who is interested ... --- First of all, many many thanks to Carlos Gonzales (president of the Spanish Sociedad de la Vihuela) who made it possible to have a closer look at this astonishingly beautiful fresco. At the moment, I'm not sure that I'm allowed to publish the photographs that Carlos so kindly supplied me with, so here is a brief description of this one of the most remarkable and perhaps 'realistic' of surviving depictions of the late 15th century viola da mano. The depicted instrument is unmistakably a five-course viola da mano, a fact that is evidenced both by the number of strings (10) and corresponding number of pegs. The string band is virtually equal in width along the whole stretch from bridge to nut and the strings appear to be equally spaced on the both ends too. There are seven double-strand frets on the neck. The peg head is sickle-shaped and surmounted with a carved animal head; this last seems to appear as a separate part joined to the walls of the peg head and is of 'golden' colour, perhaps was gilded on the original(?). The right hand of the player (angel?) grips the neck in the area of the three upper frets in what appears almost like a closed grip, so that the thumb protrudes above the surface of the fingerboard shading the outer course (in other words indicating that the neck is fairly shallow). The soundboard is edged with double lines of red-brown and golden 'purfling' which continues a short distance along the edges of the neck and then ends rather abruptly, perhaps at the bottom end of the fingerboard. The lower area of the soundboard, including the bridge, is where the fresco appears to have been damaged, and it's difficult to see if the strings are tied to the bridge with a usual loop over the top surface of it (it almost looks like the two strings of the first course are ...). The rose does appear to have been painted on 'top' of the strings (although a number of individual strings 'below' are still visible) and its design can be, to a certain extent, re-established: it looks like an inset, three-tier(?) gilded rose, with a four-petal flower design in its centre. The sides of the instrument are painted blue (background), with greyish borders of lines and segment-like ornamental shapes stopping a short distance of pointed corner joints. (There is a similar sort of decoration consisting of large and small 'chain' of circles on the sides of the four-course guitar illustrated in Mercenne's Harmonie Universelle, 1636; which he, in turn, copied from the Phalese Guitar book of 1570. So perhaps there is a link here with the earlier ways of decorating instruments ...) It is interesting to speculate about the string length of this viola da mano. Unfortunately I still don't have the complete picture so as to get a more precise idea about it but judging by the size of the hand and relative positioning of the 7th fret, the string length may be around 50 - 52cm. For me personally, one of the most important features of this late 15th century representation of the viola da mano is the presence of even number of strings - 10. It means that the odd /even string number 'divide' was already present in the early days of the viola da mano's history and which seems to have been common for the forthcoming vihuela tradition too. Not to mention, of course, the rather tight gathering of strings in the string band, together with more or less perpendicular positioning of the palm of the right hand relative to it - strong indication for the 'thumb out' way of plucking. I know that Carlos has uncovered some more new sources of the vihuela iconography in Córdoba and perhaps some other places of Spain. It would be great to see his research, for the benefit of us all, published one day. But for the moment, great many thanks to him again! Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: 6-course Viola-Vihuela with 11 pegs?
- Original Message - From: Roger E. Blumberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Alexander Batov [EMAIL PROTECTED]; vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2006 1:04 AM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: 6-course Viola-Vihuela with 11 pegs? Alrighty, thanks for the clarifications. I wasn't aware that some 12 peg instruments had bridges allowing for only 11 strings, interesting. In fact, only one so far ... If you look at this http://www.vihuelademano.com/quito/quito-vihuela.htm you'll see what I mean. Well, the 5-course guitarra spagnuola, despite being usually provided with 10 pegs / peg holes in its peg head, seems to have been most often strung with a single first course (i.e. 9 strings in all). However, there are hardly any original bridges survived so one can't be sure whether this way of stringing was also reflected in provision of corresponding number of holes in the bridge (or, in case of slotted bridge, there would have been a shallow slot for the first course, as in case with the Quito vihuela). Who knows, perhaps it was both ways, depending on what was required ...? BTW, do you have a close-up of the Pinturicchio instrument's peg-box around (that I could see)? I wish I had a good quality close-up of this and that's why the peg number is under ? in the quote that I gave (I can just barely count them ...). Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: 6-course Viola-Vihuela with 11 pegs?
On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 04:17:06 -0800 Roger E. Blumberg wrote:
== 6-course Viola/Vihuela with 11 pegs/strings, 16th cent ==
I take it Alexander and maybe others are looking for iconographical
evidence
of one of these? Or is it just an occurrence of asymmetrical L-R peg-count
and arrangement on the _later_ style of peg-box that matters here?
http://www.vihuelademano.com/abrantes-vihuela.htm
Yes, Roger, it is an occurrence of asymmetrical peg arrangement on a
flat-type peg head, also with the odd number peg configuration. It may also
be that some instruments (vihuela / viola da mano) with an even number of
pegs (in this case, symmetrically positioned on a flat-type peg head) were
actually designed only to be strung with an odd number of strings. The only
surviving example that illustrates this is the Quito vihuela: 12
symmetrically positioned peg holes but the slots in the bridge only allow to
string it up with 11 strings.
In any event, I accidentally noticed the same today on this (old familiar)
icon, 6 (left) and 5 (right) pegs, for an early eleven string viola
Girolamo Libri 1520:
Actually all known to me occurrences of odd peg numbers (either 9 or 11) on
viola da mano with a viol-type peg head (lateral pegs) are listed on this
page:
http://www.vihuelademano.com/rcmdias.htm (about one-third down the page, or
see below)
(quote) A number of early 16th century iconographical sources show
instruments which can equally be qualified either as viola da mano or
vihuela. Their main difference is in the shape of the body which appears to
have either a c-shaped (cornered) or incurved waist but such features as peg
head construction and the number of pegs seem to have been shared by both
types. On some of the well-known depictions of such instruments their peg
heads are clearly shown and the number of pegs can be exactly counted. This
number is predominantly either nine or eleven for five- and six-course
instruments accordingly. Those depictions are: Anonymous (Sardinian school),
Madonna and child with angels musicians, c.1500 (Castelsardo) - 9 pegs;
Bernardino Pinturicchio, fresco, c.1492 (Rome, Vatican) - 11 pegs? ; Luca
Signorelli, Coronation of the elect, c.1500 (Orvieto Cathedral) - 9 pegs;
intarsia door in Palazzo Ducale, c.1507 (Mantua) - 11 pegs; Anonymous
fresco, Santa Maria della Consolazione, c.1503 (Ferrara) - 11 pegs; Girolamo
di Libri, Madonna and child with saints, c.1520 (Metropolitan Museum of
Art) - 11 pegs.(end of quote)
I suppose one more representation the11-string viola da mano can be added to
this list, also by Girolamo dai Libri ('Madonna and Child with St Anne', the
National Gallery, London) that shows a smaller viola da mano with a
guitar-like shaped body.
Alexander
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning? (battente guitar)
- Original Message - From: Martyn Hodgson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Alexander Batov [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Cittern NET cittern@cs.dartmouth.edu; Vihuela Net vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 8:24 AM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning? (battente guitar) However, I'm still puzzled why you are so certain that folded top guitars were not introduced until the mid 18thC: that some/many instruments were converted in the 18thC does not, of course, mean that they were not known earlier. I'm neither certain nor uncertain! May I quote again what I've said in my previous posting: If there is such evidence (perhaps you know), then we can deal with it ... instead of doing so with imaginings. Regarding evidence for earlier instruments might I respectfully suggest you look at a wider range of instruments: the instrument illustrated in Baines (possibly the most widely known and readily available standard illustrated reference work) is just one that might be a 17thC instrument in original state. Thanks for your suggestion. May I also in return respectfully suggest you either not to read the texts that accompany such illustrations in Baines, including the naming of the instruments, or at least do this with a pinch of salt. Perhaps then we can move on a bit further from the dead point. And we can't seriously discuss things applying a 'might be a 17thC instrument' sort of definitions and build our conclusions based on such presumptions. We either know that it is a 17th century instrument or it is not. P's Theatrum Instrumentorum (Barenreiter facsimile 1976) has on plate XVI an instrument P calls 'Laute mit Abzugem oder Testudo Theorbato' which looks very similar to an archlute but with end fastening strings passing over (ie not ending on) a bridge. I'm glad that we've finally established what we are talking about! So, can you actually see the fold where the bridge is situated? Finally, I'm not the only one who thinks the instrument may have been around earlier than you suppose (see Peter Forrester's recent communication). I know you aren't. And that's what keeps us going ;)) Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning?
Have you studied how the strings of early citterns were fixed? Very much like this, as I understand it. I was not thinking of conversions. And a canted top is not needed to play on wire. I know they did that in the 18th c. And they shortened the necks of existing instruments. All to reach a loud tone and high string tension. In the 16th and 17th centuries there were Citterns, Orpharions and Bandore/pandore with wire, also with long stringlengths. None of those needed canted tops since the string tension is not higher than with gut. The guitar has for a part been used quite much in the same way as the cittern, accompaniment in strummed chordal textures. In the same environment, probably. There seems to be very little physical reasons to prevent that wire strings were also used on the guitar. That in itself is no proof it actually was, indeed. I've actually made several of the each of the above-mentioned instruments .. Anyway, thanks for this enlightening information. Perhaps, as you say, I should really 'study' more. The mandola/mandora debate is still open. There is an article about it by Renato Meucci from 2001: 'Da chitarra italiana a chitarrone: una nuova interpretazione.' Enrico Radesca da Foggia, atti del convegno, a cura di Francesca Seller, Lucca, LIM: 37-57. (thanks for sending, Monica) It's quite much a matter of conviction. I'm not sure on what side I am. The 'Chitarra Italiana' existed, and it was certainly different from its more successful Spanish relative. It (usually?) only had 4 courses, was sometimes strummed (Millioni) and sometimes plucked (conserto vago?). Has very little (extant) repertoire of its own. Wire strung? Thanks again, I have this article for quite a while now ... The important point here is not just in the name (i.e. chitarra italiana) but also where the named instrument comes from or referred to (region of the country, in this particular case). That's, partly, why it's so difficult to pin it down ... For example, a seven-string (four-course) guitar-like shaped instrument is depicted on a pilaster of the Duomo of Cremona c.1560 (actually quite nicely 'wrapped up' in an open book - of music, I presume ...). I wish I could rely on my conviction more but that would be a sort of dangerous tool in my profession ;) So I'd rather replace it with a good deal of reasoning coupled with a thoughtful exploration of real material objects (ancient musical instruments in my case). Best wishes, Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning?
- Original Message - From: Martyn Hodgson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Cittern NET cittern@cs.dartmouth.edu; Early Guitar NET early-guitar@cs.dartmouth.edu; Vihuela Net vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 2:48 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning? Dear Martyn, Thanks very much for your reply (also privately) and I do apologise for the delay wit my. I'm just a bit hectic at the moment preparing for the Greenwich exhibition starting at 10 November and hence my time in front of computer screen is rather limited. Anyway, perhaps you'd like to come round on one of the days. It would be great to meet you and discuss things in more detail. I am genuinely open minded about all this and remain to be convinced either way: clearly, some guitars seem to have been converted to be wire strung with shorter necks and folded bellies - possibly in the mid 18th C (but why done not earlier?), however there seem to be examples (eg the Hill one) where this is not the case and we have an earlier instrument set up with folded belly, end string fastening and short neck. I think much more work needs to be done here. I'm as open-minded as it can only be on this subject too! Why the conversion started at appr. mid-18th century onwards and not earlier, because there wasn't any need to do so before. Large size (regarding string length) early - mid 17th century guitars largely became obsolete by the mid-18th century, so they were simply most 'convenient' object for such a conversion. And it was mostly vaulted back ones that were converted, not many flat backs. I'm starting to get a bit confused about the Hill guitar that you mention. Do you mean the guitar with the inscription Giogio Sellas ... Venetia / 1627 ..., described under No. 39 in Boyden's catalogue? Also, I'm not so sure about the presumption that the folded mandolin belly had to be invented before such a constructional technique could be applied to the guitar. I agree but where are such guitars (surviving instrument, depictions etc)? In my earlier posting I only mentioned of chronological coincidence of folding tops being added (by means of conversion or whatever) to guitars and arising Neapolitan mandoline tradition. In fact the use of such construction may well have already been there in Praetorius' time (re: his illustration of 'Testudo Theorbata') and not obligatory related to the use of metal stings at all. It could simply be re-adopted, as the most convenient one in form of design, for the use of metal stings (or mainly metal strings to be precise) on the Neapolitan mandoline and the contemporary chitarre battente. It is also interesting that in the Portuguese tradition (perhaps not without a good deal of influence from the Italian battente guitar ...?) a somewhat different way of fixation of metal strings to a flat soundboard was adopted: with stings fastened to what appears as a 'conventional' fixed bridge and then passing over a separate movable one, just in vicinity of it. Battente guitars could make use of Alfabeto which, presumably, pre-dates the 6 course tablature Ricetti mentions. They could but there is no evidence, unless I've missed something. Again Ricetti's tablature was _supposedly_ for the battente guitar. Finally, I'm even more unclear about non-folded belly instruments which have string end fastening - like Coste's Lacote guitar much later, this could be simply an alternative gut stringing arrangement. Well, Lacote was doing all sorts of experimental designs. We'd better not mix his 19th century 'innovative spirits' to this particular topic. Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning?
Martyn, With no attempt to convince you but there is hardly any point to look for chitarra battente much further beyond mid-18th century (i.e. chronologically coinciding with the arrival of Neapolitan mandoline). Perhaps this can also suggest what sort of strings it could be strung with ... The most comprehensive research on surviving battente guitars was made, as far as I know, by Valentina Ricetti around mid-80s and published in the Liuteria magazine (in two subsequent issues). I corresponded with her at the time and supplied information on the three original battente guitars from the St-Petersburg collection (she reproduced the picture of one of them in her article). She also send me what in her words was _supposedly_ the earliest surviving tablature for battente guitar which, if I remember it right, looked like a chart of chords written out on six lines. Unfortunately I don't have neither the magazines not the tablature fragment with me at the moment, otherwise I could have given you more precise information. Alexander - Original Message - From: Martyn Hodgson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning? Ta Monica. Re low breaking stress of early wire, I find it of interest that many extant battente seem to have a shorter neck than conventional 17thC guitars. However the position of the 11th fret (ie generally close to the neck/body join) remained the same as with gut strung instruments and this is, of course, possible because the battente with folded/bent belly had a much higher bridge position than 'conventional' instruments. I'm aware of a few late 90's revisionist theories that all these are fakes or 19/20thC instruments apeing ealier instruments, but am unconvinced. A good example of an early short necked battente is in Baines (Nos 294/295) - I wonder where it is now? It's always seemed very genuine to me, but... Interestingly, on the opposite page is a guitar by 'Matteo Sellas' dated c. 1630(?) (Nos 285-7) which I think was rebuilt in the 18thC as a conventional gtr but was probably originally a battente (ie folded belly - the mark is clear, short neck) - prhps this is indirect evidence that the earlier battente tradition had declined by then. MH To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning?
Hi Lex, Yes, I know that illustration from the Corbetta 1639 and always wondered what sort of guitar that could be. Well, there are lute family instruments in Praetorius's Sintagma Musicum II 1618 -19 with strings fixed at the bottom edge too, plus his mentioning of metal strings on the 'violin' or something ... Many original early-mid 17th century guitars seem to have been converted to what is usually called 'battente guitar', with introduction of canted tops and shortened original necks. However, a number of 17th century guitars that I came across with and which still retained their original flat soundboards, were provided with five pins at the bottom edge - for seemingly no other reason as to make them appear, at least externally, as 'functioning' 5-course guitars. I suspect this was mainly done at the request of instrument dealers simply to make them look more appealing to potential customers (perhaps not earlier than in the 19th - early 20th centuries). I haven't yet inspected closely the Oxford guitar that you mention but I suspect that this may well be exactly this very case. What is in your belief so different in it as compared to other surviving 17th century vaulted-back guitars? By the way, the chord chart that I mentioned about was definitely on six-line stave, not like those found in 5-course guitar books. Could those 'dodici chitarre con corde de Cetra' be simply citterns? Alexander - Original Message - From: Lex Eisenhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 8:11 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Why re-entrant tuning? On the frontpage of Corbetta's book from 1639 there are two guitars depicted. The one at the right is clearly a guitar with the strings fixed at the end of the corpus. The strings go over the bridge. Maybe strings of wire. Mimmo Peruffo pointed out an inventory of the deceased luthier Lorenzo Filzer from Rome, from 1657, that mentiones 'dodici chitarre con corde de Cetra'. The trouble with these things is that instruments can be changed quite easily in this respect. The examples by Sellas from Nurnberg and Oxford are now set up with wire strings. They differ from other instruments with folds and shortened necks. The chord charts for battente guitars (5 course...) could be in every alfabeto book from the 17th c. (like in Corbetta's, from 1639). Lex To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Ian Woodfield's Early History of the Viol (and Vihuela)
- Original Message -
From: Roger E. Blumberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu; Alexander Batov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:50 AM
Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: Ian Woodfield's Early History of the Viol (and
Vihuela)
... I'd only point out that Woodfield says that at the earliest stage the
two instruments were in fact _identically_ constructed, interchangeable,
I wish he was a maker ;))
and
he further says (more than once) that the sequence was plucked-to-bowed,
the plucked waist-cut vihuela came first, followed shortly thereafter by
the
bowed vihuela, i.e. a bow taken to the exact same initial plucked wait-cut
vihuela -- the flat-bridged, long thin necked, smallish waist-cut bodied
variety.
I would find it really difficult to explain, if following this logic, why
that initial _plucked_ vihuela had a _waist-cut_ smallish body (perhaps he,
Woodfield, can).
He says point-blank and with confidence that vihuela de arco was
inspired by vihuela de mano.
For me the validity of this theory only makes sense if one presumes that
bowing ('chicken') as such came after plucking ('egg'). One doesn't have to
be an academician to say so ...
I have a rather beautiful recording of dutar music played by an Uzbek
musician. Uzbeks are exceptionally good players on this two-string long neck
lute which is traditionally played in a strummed sort of way. On that
particular recording the player bows it too ... I could never have imagined
that it can be played this way and it sounds great!
I have to assume his conclusion (re which came first) is based on the
dating
of the Aragonese and Valencian iconography.
Perhaps, I don't know.
Alexander
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] 'viola da mano' in the VA
There are a few interesting things in this carved panel from the VA,
including what looks like a sort of 'viola da mano'. The panel dated c.1580
but the original source (whether it was a painting or engraving) can date
c.1530 - 50 or so. I wouldn't dare to paste the direct link here (it's one
of the longest ones I've ever come across!) but it should work by typing
'lute' in the search box here:
http://images.vam.ac.uk/ixbin/hixclient.exe?_IXSESSION_=submit-
button=searchsearch-form=main/index.html
Then click on the thumb nail image in the bottom right corner; that'll
take to a page with more detailed views ('viola da mano' is more or less in
the centre of the panel).
Alexander
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Regimento dos Violeiros 1572
To celebrate the forthcoming 425 years anniversary of the Belchior Dias vihuela (1581) ... ;) here is my translation of the Regimento dos Violeiros 1572: www.vihuelademano.com/regimento.htm A couple of sentences from this document were (and still are) quoted from time to time in books, articles and on the web but not much of the rest. I think I now understand why ... So any comments and suggestions are greatly welcome. Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Anjo com Viola
On Saturday, April 01, 2006 10:28 AM Roger E. Blumberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is also the icon that shows the odd treble-foot of the bridge running down through the face of the instrument (through a hole in the top) to meet the back of the instrument and serving as a kind of sound-post. Alexander mentioned this idea a while back when we were talking about the two-bridge Timoteo Viti bowed viola. Seems to me this bridge design might be the best of both worlds, still allowing the top to vibrate rather freely (unless I'm wrong). I think you are quite right. In pre-soundpost era of the viol, for the rather flat top with lots of soundholes this might be indeed the best solution: freeing the top from excessive string pressure, balancing the sound throughout the instrument's range (important for consort playing!) and getting rid of wolf-tones, all at once ... Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Anjo com Viola
On Friday, March 31, 2006 10:19 PM Rob MacKillop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fascinating, Alexander. Five double frets - reminiscent of viols? Rob That's right, it is quite remarkable that even double frets didn't escape attention of the painter. Well, I'm mostly happy that the pegs didn't! (\__/) (='.'=) E[:]|[:]3 () () Also, it's difficult to say for sure but it seems that the pegs are inserted from the face side of the peg head (catching more of reflecting light than the ends of the pegs would do), not from the rear - heads up, so to say, as on some surviving citterns. Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: 9 pegs
On Wednesday, January 04, 2006 4:25 PM Peter Forrester [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm sure that I've seen at least one more illustration of a 9 peg guitar. Do you mean the one illustrated in the last issue of the Spanish Vihuela Society journal and of which Monica have made us aware recently ? It is a very beautiful picture (thanks very much to Monica again for providing me with an image of it!). The depicted guitar has a rather wide body and its fingerboard has 'points' (both these features are in line with the surviving 'Chambure' vihuela). Also worth to mention the presence of maker's stamp on the soundboard extension over the neck and slots (instread of holes) in pegs. However there is at least one actual instrument - Giovanni Tesler, Ancona, 1618; Musee Instrumentale, Nice. cat G.1784. Several illustrations in: Guitares, pub. Flute de Pan, 1980. I believe that the neck has been shortened and perhaps the bridge replaced. Otherwise it seems very original. Apart from the 9-peg guitar in the Nice Musee Instrumentale that you mention there are at least two others: one in privite collection in Italy (the image of its peg head is illustrated in my online article The Royal Colllege Dias - guitar or vihuela?, at http://www.vihuelademano.com/vg-crossroads/LStalk/9-peg.jpg, some other iconographical representations of 9-peg guitars are also illustrated there, see plate3 of http://www.vihuelademano.com/rcmdias.htm). The other guitar is in the Kunsthistorisches Museum Vienna (I wonder if the instrument is still there but it is illustrated in J.Schlosser's catalogue Die Sammlung alter Musikinstrumente). What we need now is a picture of 11-string vihuela ;') ... or do we really? Happy New Year, Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: vihuela grande
On Wednesday, December 07, 2005 3:40 PM Roger E. Blumberg wrote: Following the lines of the resent discussion of large-size vihuelas and guitars here is a late 15th - early 16th century Catalan picture (which isn't very often reproduced) that shows what appears to be a sort of double bass size vihuela or viola da mano: http://www.vihuelademano.com/current/pages/vihuela-grande.htm Alexander, is this image still around? Pretty please ;') Thanks Roger Thank you, Roger, for pointing this out. There was a hard drive failure on my server about a week ago and, although they promised to restore everything as it was, this page seems to have had 'mysteriously disappeared. It is back there now: http://www.vihuelademano.com/current/pages/vihuela-grande.htm Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: The Quito vihuela
On Monday, December 05, 2005 1:58 PM [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... I have a similar problem with the bridge of my guitar! The slots for the 1st, 2nd and 3rd courses have worn away so that is is dificult to tie the two strings of a course so that they stay apart. I have to use a litle strip of card board underneath them! Will have to have a new bridge one day... This can be easily resolved by replacing the top part of the bridge, instead of fitting a new one. With some care the slots in this top part can even be shaped to resemble those of the Quito bridge - very practical idea indeed! ... I wonder if it could be slightly older that the early 17th century. St. Mariana might have inherited from a predecessor, and just used it to just pick out the melody or second part as she sung. that would explain why it is not a female-friendly instrument! Difficult to say at the moment. From constructional point of view, however, it may most certainly mirror earlier, flat-back models of the vihuela (i.e. from late 16th century), in particularly such features as two-bar arrangement on the soundboard and one-piece neck / neck block / peg head construction. In fact these are also featured on some surviving early - mid 17th century Italian guitars which is, in a way, hardly surprising. Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] The Quito vihuela
The Quito vihuela is in such a remote location, even with modern communications, it remains difficult to access information about it. However, thanks to the pictures that were kindly provided by one of the members of this vihuela community - Ariel Abramovich who visited Quito earlier this year and who is himself a dedicated professional player of the vihuela, now there is another bit of rare and precious information pertaining to its construction available. In the most thorough description of the Quito vihuela to date (see Egberto Bermudez's article The Vihuela: The Paris and Quito Instruments which appeared in The Spanish Guitar, New York - Madrid 1992, p.45) there is the following description of the bridge of this instrument: 'The bridge has holes for five courses of double strings and one for a single string course (the first)'. What is remarkable however is that the original bridge has slots rather than holes, in a similar way as is found on the bridges of the E.0748 'Chambure' vihuela as well as some surviving Spanish and Portuguese guitars. A close-up photograph of the bridge shows five slots for double courses and one rather shallow slot for the first single course. The slots for double courses are designed with a V- shaped upper edge thus allowing for individual strings of the courses to sit next to the sides of the slots (i.e. be positioned at the maximum widths of the slots). What is also interesting - as far as the quality of the photograph allows - is that the wear from strings, which is mostly noticeable on the back edge of the bridge, appears in the areas of the first (single), second, third and, to a lesser degree, forth courses. There is very little, if any, noticeable wear of the edge in the areas of the fifth and sixth courses. This could of course be due to the rather low resolution of the photograph. The other explanation may be that the strings of the fifth and sixth courses were considerably thicker than the higher pitched thinner strings to cause similar signs of wear. But can it also be that the instrument was, for a fairly prolonged period of time, (mainly used) strung with only four courses? It would of course be interesting in this respect to relate the signs of wear on the bridge with that of the fingerboard. And so perhaps Monica's idea of the rather simplified use of the instrument by Mariana the Saint is not that far fetched?! Unfortunately the above-mentioned Egberto Bermudez description of the Quito vihuela (although mentioning the signs of wear on the bridge: . there is evidence of string tension on the bridge) is not very specific and does not mention the appearance of wear on the fingerboard. The other remarkable feature of the Quito vihuela bridge is the carved decorations on both its ends in the shape of stylized animal heads. A very similar decorative element also appears in mustachios of a number of surviving Spanish guitars that are associated with Cádiz school of makers, in particular its distinguished representatives such as Juan Pages and Josef Benedid. With a better quality close-up picture of the inlayed ebony decorations surrounding the sound hole one can clearly see silver thread running in the middle of the veins of the ornament. For more details have a look here: http://www.vihuelademano.com/quito/quito-vihuela.htm Alexander Batov To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] vihuela grande
Following the lines of the resent discussion of large-size vihuelas and guitars here is a late 15th - early 16th century Catalan picture (which isn't very often reproduced) that shows what appears to be a sort of double bass size vihuela or viola da mano: http://www.vihuelademano.com/current/pages/vihuela-grande.htm Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: What is the historical vihuela?
Philippe have just sent me the rather intriguing accounts from the biography of Mademoiselle de Charolais (see below). After all this ... she must have been able to play the guitar! I hope Philippe won't be against my sharing his email with the other vihuela-list subscribers. Alexander - Original Message - From: Philippe Mottet [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Alexander Batov [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2005 4:37 PM Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] Re: What is the historical vihuela? It is a nice picture. Who painted it and when? It is difficult to judge the string length - and the strings of the courses look rather far apart! My dainty fingure would fit in between them. Yes, the painter didn't seem to care about arranging strings more orderly. Otherwise it is a fairly accurate picture of the guitar. I've put another picture on the same page: www.vihuelademano.com/current/pages/large-guitar.htm Supposedly, they both represent the same person - Mademoiselle de Charolais (no idea who she is). The one in colour is of unknown painter c. 1715 and the other in black and white is attributed to J. -M. Nattier, c. 1730. The main point about these paintings (apart from the looks of course!) is that the depicted guitars are very likely to be identified as being made by the renowned Voboam family of makers in Paris. Some of their surviving guitars (the point that is more relevant to our discussion) have just over 71cm string length. Louise-Anne de Bourbon-Condé will keep to her death her envied title of « Mademoiselle » : a scandalous, free and absolutely independant Princess. Her long collection of lovers was famous, as she changed and abandonned the one after the other, and never maried. Grand-daughter of Louis XIV and Madame de Montespan, Mlle de Charolais used to choose the mistresses of her cousin Louis XV, as she « wanted him to avoid the life of a burgher ». She was a close friend of Voltaire. The two guitars carefully painted on the portraits (cf. Alexander¹s website) are two different instruments, but surely both from the Voboam dynasty. I would say both of Jean. The first portrait, (Musée des Beaux-Arts de Tours) shows an heavily decorated guitar, with a double black and white « pistagne » around the table and the rosette. The decoration of the fingerboard is the negative of the famous « Rizzio » Voboam of the RCM in London. The other guitar seen on the wonderful portrait by Nattier is more simple, close to the « classic » model of Alexandre (1676, Paris E.1532) or Jean (1690, Paris 2087). I would personnaly attribute this instrument to Jean, considering the very end of the XVIIth century more plausible as a date of construction / commission, considering also the detail of decoration of the head. Another guitar of Jean Voboam (Paris 1687) is still preserved in Paris (E.1411) with its original case, engraved with the Blason of Marie-Thérèse de Bourbon-Condé, another Princess of the same family. Though these two Princesses were not giants, the hands rather chubby ( ?), their guitars had a good diapason ! The average length of all preserved guitars by Jean and Alexandre Voboam is just over 690 mm, with some at 710 and 711 by Alexandre. In my experience, that I would appreciate to share with other makers, the long diapasons Voboam, with a chanterelle tuned in d, are particularly sweet, free, less « geometric » than shorter (650mm) models. Philippe To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: What is the historical vihuela?
I think you have answered most of my queries very thoroughly! Thank you! It is a nice picture. Who painted it and when? It is difficult to judge the string length - and the strings of the courses look rather far apart! My dainty fingure would fit in between them. Yes, the painter didn't seem to care about arranging strings more orderly. Otherwise it is a fairly accurate picture of the guitar. I've put another picture on the same page: www.vihuelademano.com/current/pages/large-guitar.htm Supposedly, they both represent the same person - Mademoiselle de Charolais (no idea who she is). The one in colour is of unknown painter c. 1715 and the other in black and white is attributed to J. -M. Nattier, c. 1730. The main point about these paintings (apart from the looks of course!) is that the depicted guitars are very likely to be identified as being made by the renowned Voboam family of makers in Paris. Some of their surviving guitars (the point that is more relevant to our discussion) have just over 71cm string length. Well - even I would be happy with that string length. I suppose me too, however I would still prefer to play certain pieces on a vihuela with longer string length and it is often not an extra stretch that bothers me but the rather wide spread of courses over the fingerboard (i.e. if they are spaced more to the 'standards' of a modern reproduction of Renaissance lute). This is what puzzles me a bit as I can't see the advantage of having a long string length for accompanying. Maybe I am mistaken, but I would have thought the purpose of a long string length would be to tune to a lower pitch. Such an instrument would play the lowest part in consort as in the Valderrabano as you say. Tuning to a lower pitch is obviously one of the reasons. Longer string length however leads to greater sonority, power, and greater physical sensation of the sound. We have to remember that musicians in the 16th and most of the 17th centuries have only one string material to rely on - gut (talking about gut-strung instruments of course) and no other means of amplification of the sound as only by changing the size and shape of their instrument's resonating body and the string length accordingly. And how all this drastically started to change from the mid-18th century! For instance, somebody asked another day about the purpose of doubling strings in courses and this was another way to boost up the sonority by creating, so to say, a richer 'harmonic environment', the sort of 'fullness' of the sound (the phenomenon that happens when two strings are tuned to unison / octave but the higher partials of their vibrating modes can never totally coincide neither in frequency nor in phase, they are a bit out of tune). Interesting that Spanish seem to continue to cling to double courses on their guitars longer than others! Still, maybe St. Mariana didn't have a choice - she just had to make do with whatever the convent could provide her with! Or had a secret accompanist . Alexander (Sorry of repeating what Howard has already said. I've only just read his email. Reinforces my point in a way .) To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: What is the historical vihuela?
On 05 Nov 2005 14:17 Monica Hall wrote: Yes. The question in my mind was whether the instrument could be confidently dated from the 1620s or whether it might actually date from the second half of the 18th century. It would be most unusual for a guitar from the second half of the 18th century to have its string length as long as the Quito. As you probably know, with virtually universal adaptation of open-wound and close-wound strings for plucked and bowed instruments in the second part of the 18th century the tendency was heading in the opposite direction - to shorter string length on guitars. In absolute figures, anything longer than 67cm would be rather unusual. The earliest recorded use of overspun strings I have come across so far in Spanish sources is in the 'Inventory of Theodosio Dalp's property ...' of 26 February 1715 that lists One lathe to wind strings with silver ... (Un torno de torzer cuerdas de plata thasado todo en cuarenta ...) At least one of the ways to date the Quito instrument more precisely is to conduct dendrological analysis of its soundboard wood; looking for wear marks on the bridge can also give some idea how the instrument was used etc .. A similar research that was conducted with the Chambure and Jaquemart-Andre instruments in Paris would be ideal (the results are published in 'Aux origines de la guitare: la vihuela de mano', Cite de la Museque, 2004) would be ideal. And not only for the Quito but for the Dias too but I'd better not start ... The string length however is only really relevant in so far as this has any bearing on its authenticity. I would question whether a female player, who probably didn't have the technical ability of Rolf Lislevand, would have been able to play anything meaningful on an instrument of that size. I've put an image of a lady here who plays a rather large guitar: www.vihuelademano.com/current/pages/large-guitar.htm However, whether she was able to play anything meaningful or just posing is hardly possible to assess. In the mean time I have had a lengthy and very helpful reply from Antonio which has answered all my questions in so far as this is possible. ??? I am aware that a number of baroque guitars have long string lengths. I don't know how people manage to play them.I understand that Linda Sayce had an exact copy of the Stradivarius guitar made which has a string length of 74.1 and she found it unplayable. Apparently there is at least one more guitar by Stradivarius (made in 1681) with the same body dimensions as the one in Oxford (i.e. made on the same mould as is often the case with other instruments of Stradivarius) and so would have been its original string length (the guitar have been altered to 6 strings with subsequent shortening of the neck). It was commissioned by the Guistiliani, aristocratic Venetian family, so it may perhaps give some idea what sort of music was played on it (hopefully it wasn't only used to pose with). It would be interesting to hear the views of the gentlemen on this list as to the optimum string lengths for vihuelas and guitars. Not a problem. As for the string lengths of modern reproductions of vihuelas, common sense would be the best guide, supposedly this was also the case in 16th century Spain. Most vihuela players nowadays will be happy with c. 60cm string length for the most demanding vihuela repertoire although some might prefer c.56 - 58cm depending I suppose on their skills. The vast majority of the vihuela solo pieces can be played on c.64 - 66cm but this can go up to 70cm and more for fairly basic song accompaniments. Considering that this was one of the main uses of the instrument during the 16th century, c.68 - 72cm could well be the string length range for a typical 16th century vihuela. I personally feel comfortable with a good number of vihuela pieces, for instance, on my 66cm string vihuela in E and it still remains in my plans to make a 72 - 73 cm string vihuela, to use it for a larger instrument in Valderrabano duets (a fifth apart). Nobody can ever be sure of the precise figures for the string lengths of historic vihuelas but it doesn't seem unreasonable to expect a great deal of discrepancy in the sizes of the consort of 16th century vihuelas (for example of the four sizes which are needed to perform the above mentioned Valderrabano duets) from that of mid - late 16th century Italian lutes. So the upper limit could well be extended to c.80cm or more (i.e. close to the-would-be original string length of the Jaquemart-Andre vihuela). Although largely speculative, there is at least one important reason (apart from similarity in repertoire and functions of the two instruments) that led me to such a broad speculation: that the makers and players of 16th vihuelas and lutes (either in Italy or in Spain) could well have been relying on the same string suppliers, from places such as Munich, Rome and
[VIHUELA] Re: vihuela and viola
- Original Message - From: Stuart Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Alexander Batov [EMAIL PROTECTED]; vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 7:35 PM Subject: Re: [VIHUELA] vihuela and viola Alexander, You say we have absolutely no idea what sort of barring arrangement violas might have had. But surely we - or makers like you - do have some idea. Some violas look very similar to vihuelas, and were made at roughly the same time, and not geographically distant and play the same sort of sophisticated, polyphonic music. It would at least be reasonable conjecture and certainly not idle speculation to bar a viola like a vihuela, wouldn't it? I have the idea that early guitars (and for you there's no difference between 16th/17th century guitars and vihuelas?) had a couple of bars on the soundboard and a couple of bars (or three?) on the back. No doubt there are a million subtleties of exactly how these bars are fashioned. So there's a tradtion of barring flat-backed, plucked instruments and violas could just be part of that tradition. I agree with most that you say here, Stuart. And my reasoning goes exactly along the same lines. Or, do you think there is a possibility that violas had la much more complicated lute-like barring? Yes, this possibility cannot be excluded. In particularly as regards those illustrations where somewhat 'lute-type' rose is depicted (as in our beloved dai Libri painting). I also like the two Japanese paintings: however similar the instruments look like their bodies are of different depths, the ribs and pegheads are also different. (Or, Monica-style; we just don't know, will never know and it's all (mere?) speculation... ) Not really. The very idea that the resonating box as such didn't change much (if at all!) from the time of the viola da mano / vihuela makes more sense to me than just abrupt rejection of 'we'll never know' style. I simply cannot imagine anything extraordinary in its construction (and I wonder if anybody will) that would set us back from re-creating a fairly reasonable reconstruction of either vihuela or viola da mano or 4-course guitar. A lot of makers do this already simply following their intuition; and this cannot be entirely wrong. But those deeper-bodied violas with deeply incurved sides - the ones that look like they could be bowed as well as plucked; might they have a different barring arrangement, more viol-like? ( I have no idea how viols are barred.) I wonder what you think, as a maker, of the possibility of an instrument that could equally be bowed or played with the fingers? It somehow seems unlikely to me. It doesn't seem likely to me either. Well viols were ocassionally plucked even in the early 18th century but that's different, if only in that sort of way. Perhaps that's why I don't like Jimmy Page's idea of bowing his guitar, sounds rather boring (in particularly on his early sessions) ... Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: What is the historical vihuela?
- Original Message - From: Edward Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Alexander Batov [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Monica Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED]; vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 11:25 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: What is the historical vihuela? I have a friend, Tyler Kaiser, who owns a Dan Larson replica of the 74 cm guitar. He has absolutely no problems at this length for the solo literature. ed At 07:19 PM 11/10/2005 +, Alexander Batov wrote: I am aware that a number of baroque guitars have long string lengths. I don't know how people manage to play them.I understand that Linda Sayce had an exact copy of the Stradivarius guitar made which has a string length of 74.1 and she found it unplayable. Thank you for this information, Edward. Only what you quoted as my words are actually not my (they were in the context of my reply to Monica), or perhaps you didn't : ... I know rather well that guitars with this sort of length are playable. Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: What is the historical vihuela?
I have been trying to get hold of a copy of Aux origines de la guitare published by Cite de la musique - so far without success. It doesn't seem to be possible to order it via their web site. Has anyone else seen it or got a copy of it? Monica Don't know if you managed to succeed but I ordered my copy back in June and it was OK. To order through their web site (it would probably be wiser to use Internet Explorer as it seems that's what they prefer in order to succeed in shopping): 1) go to http://www.cite-musique.fr/ 2) click welcome 3) on the left menu click bookshop / order online 4) this will open a la booutique window in which under la musee de la musique button choose colloque et sciences 5) the desired publication is fifth from the top of the list 6) click consecutively commander, ma commander, valider ma commande 7) fill in your card details et voila! Important: If at any time prompted to install ActiveX controls, click yes. I suppose your Internet Explorer should be up to date. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: What is the historical vihuela?
I don't quite understand why the string length on the Quito instrument became such an issue. There is a number of surviving early 17th century Italian guitars with string length between 72 - 73 cm. A rare vaulted-back guitar by Magno Grail c.1630, for example, was sold recently on one of the musical instrument auctions in France and it has string length of 73.5cm. Some surviving guitars of the Voboam family have string length of c. 71cm. Are stretches across the fingerboard really so problematic for a skilful player (Rolf Lislevand and the like ...)? Does it really matter who the Quito vihuela belonged to (as regards of its string length of course ... not the saint!)? Alexander - Original Message - From: Rob MacKillop [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'vihuela' vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Friday, November 04, 2005 7:44 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] Re: What is the historical vihuela? For those interested, there is a picture of this guitar on this page: http://www.musicintime.co.uk/vihuelaIntro.htm Rob To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: Doubts over the additional 'peghole'
Martyn, I've explained this point already a few times, i.e. why the original _thinner_ peg wouldn't cut through the purfling but just be next to it, as well as why it is not surrounded by the ornamental pattern. Also it is not unusual for pegs to cut through stripes and purflings of peghead ornament on original guitars (there are plenty of examples of this). If you are really so sceptical about my way of reasoning as regards to the purpose of the central hole in the Dias why can't you propose an alternative, from your point of view right reason for its origin (no straps and nails in the wall please!). Alexander - Original Message - From: Martyn Hodgson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Vihuela Net vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 8:41 AM Subject: [VIHUELA] Doubts over the additional 'peghole' Further to all this, I'm not at all persuaded that the extra 'peg hole' is original: as mentioned in previous communications with Alexander, this particular hole cuts through the inlaid decoration rather than being incorporated into the overall pattern as with the pegholes proper. rgds MH To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: vaulted/fluted back
On Wednesday, October 26, 2005 8:24 PM bill kilpatrick wrote: i merely guess ... you know. I know you do. but i would have thought that the wooden bowl was one of the first instrument sound chambers (drums, hollow logs, etc.). No doubt that most traditional instruments were made like this. presumably, a thin bowl would resonate better than a thick one and undulating ribs would add strength to the structure - and beauty. great care is taken with the carving of charangos to get it right. In properly established traditions of musical instrument making there is no place for things that simply don't work. A resonating chamber bowl can have either thin or thick walls (whether it is carved or build-up), it all depends what it makes as a whole. And one can't transfer a carved body features directly to a build-up type. I very much doubt if undulating ribs can add strenth to a carved type of body, while for the build-up construction this can be rather crutial. i'm sorry, what experiment? To your initial query: does the vaulted, fluted back of the vihuela serve any purpose other than bellezza? On Tuesday, October 18, 2005 8:22 PM I answered this: The best way to answer this question would be to construct two vihuelas (one with a vaulted and the other with a fluted back) that would have to have identical string lengths and body / soundboard parameters (i.e. equal air volumes enclosed in their bodies, closely matched soundboard material, soundboard thickness and rose design etc). I was thinking of conducting such experiment myself but the motivation have not yet reached a desired level. Anybody fancies a sponsorship ... :) ...? Perhaps after the olive season is over ... Sorry for the repeat. just out of curiosity - have you ever carved an instrument from a solid piece of wood? i'm negotiating with someone in mexico at the moment for a jarana. I atually did but it was a simple one, in fact a copy of the 12th century psaltery-like seven-string instrument that was excavated in the ancient city of Novgorod in Russia (a very beautiful place by the way). It's a sort of blend between Chinese Guqin and Welsh Crwth ... Alexander www.vihuelademano.com To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: What is the historical vihuela?
On Tuesday, November 01, 2005 10:43 PM Rob MacKillop wrote: Seriously, If Alexander is saying (and I may have misunderstood him) that the vihuela and the guitar are one and the same, is Fuenllana's 5c vihuela music (in baroque guitar tuning) the earliest 5c guitar music? Can't see why not. Acoustically the vihuela and the guitar at that particular time were serving the same purpose (i.e. were both used for playing polyphonic music). In fact as it was the case with the four-course guitar. I don't think there is anything new in this. And should it therefore be played on a 5c guitar? [I am avoiding using the term 'baroque guitar' as the word 'baroque' is misleading and is of course a modern name, which should be dropped from the nomenclature.] If you were to make a 5c vihuela, Alexander, how might it differ from a 5c guitar? I'm not trying to catch you out - I am still a wee bit confused. This is where, as I see it, the crucial difference between the two guitars occurs. The early 17th century 5-course guitar is a strummed instrument with a larger size body volume (as it indeed appears on its earliest representations, such as Lionello Spada's painting c.1615) while its earlier predecessor (for the music of Fuenllana for instance) could have had shallower body (much in lines with the Dias). The lower body volume allows to shift the frequency response towards the mid-range of the instrument, thus making it more suitable for polyphonic music where clear voice leading is essential. This is of course my speculation (with only one historical instrument surviving - the Dias) but there is also vihuela's earlier companion - the viola da mano that seems to have had a rather shallow body and this might have been transferred on to the vihuela (whether in its five- or six-course configuration). Alexander www.vihuelademano.com To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: vihuela and viola
The weakest point in any of the two ways of the viola da mano reconstruction
that you mention is that we have absolutely no idea (because of lack of
surviving instruments) what sort of barring arrangement the original
instruments had. And this is a major set back whichever external shape is
chosen for the reconstruction.
Alexander
www.vihuelademano.com
- Original Message -
From: Stuart Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 9:59 PM
Subject: [VIHUELA] vihuela and viola
vihuela and viola
Today, the 16th century Spanish vihuela tends to almost completely
eclipse the Italian viola. Some (not uncontroversial) vihuelas actually
survive and, of course, there's a distinctive body of music composed for
the vihuela, starting with Milan's publication in 1536.
On the other hand, no violas survive - but there are representations of
them and they are sometimes specified in Italian tablatures ('for lute
or viola'). According to Tyler, the so-called Bottegari lute book (1574)
is really for the viola. There are depictions of violas back into the
late 15th century and even some fragments of music in tablature from
that time.
There seem to be at least two kinds of viola. One is only very slightly
waisted with a sickle-shaped pegbox. Stephen Barber and Sandy Harris
make a reproduction of one - no.9 on this page:
http://www.lutesandguitars.co.uk/htm/cat12.htm
Obviously Barber and Harris are much more interested in the vihuela than
the viola.
But there's another kind of viola with deeply incurved sides. This kind
of viola looks very like its bowed counterpart. I recently came across
this reproduction of an instrument from c1520.
http://www.anselmus.ch/fr/guitares/guitare_general.htm#signet_01
Although bowed violas and plucked violas look superficially similar, I
would expect they are significantly different in construction(?) The
bowed violas have a tail piece, and, at least sometimes, have a visibly
curved bridge. The plucked violas I've seen all have the player's arm
and hand obscuring details of bridge or tail piece.
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.7/153 - Release Date: 01/11/2005
[VIHUELA] Re: vaulted/fluted back
ON October 23, 2005 3:50 PM bill kilpatrick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: connection between a fluted, bowl-backed instrument and the fluted vihuela only makes sense if it's an aesthetic or sound improving feature that continued from an earlier time when instruments were carved from single pieces of wood - like the citole or charango. I wouldn't even dare to establish such connection. Would you? Can't think of any sound improving feature in the form of fluting that could have been directly inherited from a single-piece-carved-thing. The very idea of adaptation of the built-up construction of the body resulted in a huge step forward that allowed to change / fine-tuning the acoustical properties of the instrument's body in a much more sophisticated way (be it a vaulted-, fluted- or flat-back vihuela, viola da mano, bowed viol etc). In this light, the fluted (by means of bending, not scraping!) back of the Dias allows the achievement of a fairly rigid structure with minimum possible weight and bulk of material - a combination of properties hardly achievable with the hollowed-out type of body construction. And hence its impact on the acoustics. let's talk about how many of my sun ripened, 100% pure virgin, genuine, high quality, tuscan olives you would like in exchange for one of the tatty vihuelas you have cluttering up your studio and creating such a nuisance ... I don't quite understand how the idea of sponsoring the experiment grew into exchange for the tatty vihuela ... hm? Actually vihuelas never look tatty to me ... even if they are sun-ripened .. Alexander www.vihuelademano.com To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: vaulted/fluted back
On October 22, 2005 10:04 AM bill kilpatrick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: it obvious that olives have more value where you are than here ... how about a bartered exchange? Not a bad idea at all. I heard that sun-dried olives are particularly good for you, one of the first foods of the mankind, so to say. someone named al-halabi posted this on mike's oud site in reply to a similar question: I have not seen an oud with fluted ribs, ... etc ... ... ... Bill, First of all, I can't see any reason to directly compare fluted type ribs on Oud and / or Lute with whose of the Dias and Chambure. On the first two the fluting is made by scraping off the excess of wood (i.e. one's got to start with thicker ribs in order to produce noticeable amount of fluting), while on the second, by bending thin strips of wood (1.2 - 1.5mm thick). The ribs are also much wider than those on multi-ribbed bodies of Ouds / Lutes and, in case with the vihuelas, the shape of fluting also appears on the inside of the body. They are, in a way, two fundamentally different ways of fluting. So while fluted ribs on lutes may have been introduced primarily for decorative purposes (fluted ribs are also found on multi-ribbed vaulted-back and flat-back guitars), those on vihuelas could have had acoustical consideration as well. i had always though that fluted staves were a hallmark of medieval lutes but his suggestion that fluting is of later european origin is interesting. makes sense, i suppose as europe had more trees to work with than the middle east and more subsequent where-with-all for luthiers such as yourself to gain experience from and create with. We can't really state anything definite about medieval lutes here simply because of lacking evidence in surviving instruments. However, it does seem plausible to assume that the invention of either vaulted or vaulted and fluted back vihuela construction started fairly early in the vihuela history and can possibly be associated with introduction of build-up as opposed to hollowed-out type of body. A 16th century carved statue of an angel in Museo Catedralicio, Avila shows a four-course vihuela / guitar with a vaulted type of body. Although this is only my assumption but the way the neck joins the body (with clearly defined corner between the neck and the body outline) may suggest the build-up rather than hollowed-out construction of the body. On October 21, 2005 1:19 PM bill kilpatrick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: as the making of musical instruments became less of a DIY related craft and more of an art requiring formal training and accumulated experience and skill, the more visually pleasing aspects of carpentry turned wood joinery turned luthery - such as fluting - could have continued on in some branches of the chordaphone family. Can't think of anything in carpentry that resembles the type of fluted ribs of the two surviving vihuelas, if only the methods employed in veneering of curved surfaces. I suppose ship building is where the cutting edge of the wood working technology of the day was, all those intricate ways of bending wood ... Happily, musical instrument making in the 16th century Spain was not DIY related craft (at least as historical documents suggest). Otherwise we would have had vihuela with somewhat rectangular drawer-like box };-) being dyslexic, i'm forever reading belchior diaz as bachelor diaz ... He is honoured then! --- Alexander www.vihuelademano.com To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
[VIHUELA] Re: vaulted/fluted back
- Original Message - From: bill kilpatrick [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vihuela list vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 8:22 PM Subject: [VIHUELA] vaulted/fluted back does the vaulted, fluted back of the vihuela serve any purpose other than bellezza? - bill The best way to answer this question would be to construct two vihuelas (one with a vaulted and the other with a fluted back) that would have to have identical string lengths and body / soundboard parameters (i.e. equal air volumes enclosed in their bodies, closely matched soundboard material, soundboard thickness and rose design etc). I was thinking of conducting such experiment myself but the motivation have not yet reached a desired level. Anybody fancies a sponsorship ... :) ...? Perhaps after the olive season is over ... What is actually remarkable about the Dias model of the vihuela is its rather high String Length to Body Volume ratio. It is more than two times higher in comparison to the other fluted-back instrument (Inv. No E. 0748 Chambure in Paris). The same is true if compared with the earliest surviving guitars, including the one which is likely to have been made either by Belchior Dias himself or some other maker of his time (this guitar is currently in possession of Frank Konce, USA). This quality of the Dias vihuela perhaps contributes more to the overall sound output than such factors as fluted / non-fluted / flat back design. However, there is more than just a beauty in the fluted back; it is a very clever way to produce a rather stiff back with no needs of adding extra thickness to ribs and / or introducing greater degree of curvature to the back. And this obviously has its impact on the sound, as is a solid ebony (or other wood of comparable density) neck. In general, I would agree with Rob that richness in high partials is one of the most remarkable qualities of the Dias vihuela. To this I would also add a rather pronounced output in the middle range. I'm not so sure about the human body factor here; sounds more like a joke! It is perfectly comfortable to hold the rather small shallow bodied Dias well away off your tummy. Also difficult to imagine lots of fat-bellied vihuelistas in the 16th century so as to design a fluted back vihuela especially for them :)) Rolling marbles? Why not, only the ribs are disappointedly short. Alexander www.vihuelademano.com To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Feast of original guitars
I thought some of you might be interested in this unique concert that a friend of my James Westbrook (Brighton, UK) is organising. Only see that impressive list of original guitars (in the end of this email) that are going to be used! Alexander Batov --- --- --- Dear All, Just to remind you about the concert project, exhibition, book and now C.D.! Time is running out if you want to advertise in or support the book (please tell your friends). I would need to know for sure by 20th July, (Artwork is not needed until August 31st.). Also if you intend to come to the concert, there are only 180 seats and these are gradually selling. Book early! Once these tickets are sold, due to fire regulations/insurance etc, no one else can be admitted. I have attached a very provisional programme for the concert and C.D, which is subject to change. See the website below for 'The Century that saved the Guitar' flyer. Thank you, Jim Westbrook James Westbrook The Guitar Museum England www.theguitarmuseum.com The Concert Programme and C.D. Contents The Music Room, of the Royal Pavilion, Brighton, England. 16th January 2006 7.30 p.m. 1. J.A.Nuske - Fantasia and Variations (God save the King). C.1833 Ulrich Wedemeier, PAN. [Track 1] 2. Fernando Ferandiere - Two Pieces from Arte de la Guitararra Espanola por Musica; Rondo, El Laberinto. 1799 - Taro Takeuchi, PAG. [Track 2-3] 3.Fernando Sor- Sonata Prima pour La Guitare 'Toccata? Grand Solo' C.1804 - Taro Takeuchi, PAG. [Track 4] 4. Dionisio Aguado - Variations on the Fandango Op.16. C.1835 - Paul Gregory, LAC. [Track5] 5. Mario Giuliani - Overture by Rossini C.18?? - Taro Takeuchi STA Ulrich Wedemeier FAB [Track 6] 6. Luigi Legnani - Caprice, Paul Gregory STA [Track 7] 7. Trinidad Huerta - Four Divertimentos (dedicated to Miss Angiolina Panormo) C.18?? - Taro Takeuchi, PAN. [Track 8-11] 8. Justin Holland - Sweet thoughts Mazurka 1866 C. de Janon (Arr.) - Sweet Marie 1894 Ulrich Wedemeier CMF. [Track 12-13] 9. Julian Arcas - Lucia de Lammermoor C.18?? - Paul Gregory, TOR [Track14] Mdme S. Pratten - Caprice C.18?? - Ulrich Wedemeier, BOU [track15] 10. Francisco Tarrega - ?? C.18?? Paul Gregory, TOR [Track??] 11. Antoine de Lhoyer - Air Vare et Dialogue for Guitar Quartet. C.1814. Paul Gregory ??, Ulrich Wedemeier ??, Taro Takeuchi ??, James Westbrook ?? Key to Guitars used in the performances: GBF =1798 Giovanni Battista Fabricatore, Naples, Italy. PAG = 1802 Juan Pages six-course Guitar, Cadiz, Spain. PAN = 1825 Louis Panormo, London, England. LAC = 1830 Rene Lacote with double soundboard, Paris, France. FAB = 1830 Gennaro Fabricatore, Naples, Italy. STA = 1830's Stauffer Co., Vienna, Austria. CFM = C.1835 Christian Frederick Martin, New York, America. BOU = C.1880 Charles Boullangier/Pratten, London, England. TOR = 1889 Antonio de Torres, Almeria, Spain To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: T section frets on 19thC guitars
Martyn, I asked myself this question many times and I don't know if anybody has conducted a systematic research in this area. From my own experience, I came across clearly original T-shape frets exclusively on French guitars from the early 1820s of which at least two makers are worth of mentioning: Lacote and Mauchant (et freres). The first was one of the most innovative French guitar makers, the second is from the ancient cooking pot of French stringed instrument manufacture. I would still probably give priority to Lacote (or Etienne La Prevotte for that matter) but it's hard to be 100% certain because most of the early 19th century guitars were re-fretted later in the century or indeed in the 20th century with somewhat larger size T-frets. What is also interesting is that there seems to exist some sort of intermediate (to bar- and / or T-shape) frets which are of wedge-shape in cross-section. I saw these on some of what I would call Stauffer style guitars (made by Stauffer himself, his firm or the makers under his influence) which again can be dated from 1820s - 1830s. So the whole matter doesn't seem to be, as you say, straightforward ... As for your: Clearly it would be most unlikely for a guitar which had been refretted with T section to be later fretted with plain strips (I mean in the 19th/early 20thC), ... Do you have any particular instrument in mind? In general, it is not at all impossible. I was recently refretting a late 19th century Martin guitar with bar-frets because it had unoriginal T-shape frets! ... Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Re: Royal College Dias
Martyn Hodgson wrote (Tuesday, June 07, 2005 1:39 PM): Further to this, I forgot to mention that I do so agree with you that was clearly a continuum of instruments between the 'classical' 16thC vihuela (whatever that was - will we ever know in view of the irritating lack of Spanish iconography) and the 17thC 5 course guitar. In particular, as you say, the Dias is a very good shape to base an instrument on. Perhaps you have your own explanation of the evolution of musical instruments ... something like the Big Bang theory. I can't see a continuum between, say, the classical Oud (whatever that was) and the Chinese pi-pa but at least I can explain why, well ... because I don't know very much about it. But if the available iconography and all the passages (often mentioned on this list) from Bermudo, Covarrubias, vihuelistas' books and the historical accounts (two of them are quoted at the beginning of my last article) are not enough for you to get an idea of the continuum it is simply beyond my reason to understand your point. So maybe next time when I see 17th century hapsichord converted in the mid-18th century into hammered clavier I will just pretend that it was in fact originally a harp with the soundboard attached horisontally ... Regarding arched/fluted back vihuelas, I recall there's a passage in, I think Bermudo, where he says the depth of a vihuela is 2 or three fingers ie very shallow - has this anything to tell us - perhaps not arched/fluted? Or perhaps his fingers too fat? ... Finally, I'm still not convinced that the Chambure instrument is such a good model: even if it was a vihuela its very odd body shape must surely make it attypical. However unconvinced you are, important thing to remember though is that the maker of the Chambure knew what he was doing. Regards, Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Royal College Dias
Thanks Martyn,
Most of the points that you mention were already discussed earlier so I'd
find it rather unnecessary to start it all over again. And it seems that
you've made your choice for a strap/ribbon thing ... Why not indeed(?!)
.. ):-)
Just to add to the list of the curiosities, here is a similar way of
arrangement of pegs (to that on the Dias) but this time on one of the
Russian mid-19th century guitar that I came across:
http://www.vihuelademano.com/current/pages/7strings.htm
I wonder what the central peg hole would look like if for the next 200 years
this guitar is used as a 6-string one (i.e. with the central peg taken out
etc and with the strap put through)?
---
Just a bit of comments to your last point. I tend to look at the feature of
string spacing of the 16-th century 6-course lutes / vihuelas (note, not
11 - 13-course instruments!) in a slightly different perspective. Perhaps
the very thought that we grew a bit bigger that our ancestors seems to me
rather spooky :~)
Vihuelas, as well as contemporary to them lutes and viols came in different
sizes, i.e. families (How many vihuela sizes does Bermudo refer to? Can't
remember.) So regardless of the time scale, the logic of the instruments'
set-up parameters within the family would remain consistent in relation to
their sizes. On modern violin family instruments, for example (which is,
strictly speaking, the only surviving family of string instruments), the
difference in body size of the two neighbouring members of, say, 4/4 and 3/4
viola or cello is about 8 - 8.5%. This results in approximately the same
percentage difference in the string spacing on their nuts and bridges. You
may agree or not with this analogy but if a 60 - 64 cm string length vihuela
had, for example, 40 mm between the outer strings on the nut, the one with
56 cm could have had a few mm less than that. By the way, on the last
vihuela that I've made the outer string spacing on the nut is 37.5 mm and it
doesn't feel uncomfortable at all. It is only a matter of getting used to
it.
Regards,
Alexander
- Original Message -
From: Martyn Hodgson
To: Alexander Batov ; Lute Net ; Vihuela Net
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 11:36 AM
Subject: Re: Royal College Dias
Thanks fr yr thougt provoking paper Alexander. You asked for comments:
Firstly, congrats on marshalling new information and perpectives. I was
particularly struck with the Daret painting when you introduced to me some
months ago and I agree that the Diaz MAY have been built as a 6 course
vihuela but think that the weight of evidence is rather less conclusive than
you and on balance I still think it more likely to have been built as a 5
course guitar. A few points:
1. Decoration (presumably original) on the face of the Diaz peghead
specifically makes a feature of all the pegholes, except for the 'extra'
one; indeed, it even cuts through part of the decorative line. This
suggests to me that the instrument was not originally built with this
additional peghole.
2. Plate1 second from left (17thC guitar) shows an extra peghole in another
instrument. I wonder if this extra hole was not made to allow for an extra
string in the late 18thC to convert to a 6 course guitar (as you'll know
many early guitars were converted around 1800, but mostly to 6 single
strings so did not require additional pegs). Unfortunately, the absence of a
bridge ( Plate 4) does not allow us to date it on stylistic grounds and say
wether it was contemporary with the body of the instrument or a later
addition.
6-course guitar conversion is certainly a possibility
3. The very small ('pin') hole in the top of the Diaz peghead is very close
to the edge: do you really think it could have been made significantly
larger without splitting out at the top? This risk might have prevented it
from being used for a strap/ribbon and thus requiring another hole which did
not breach the makers cartouche or interfere with other pegs.
4. Small string spacing at the BRIDGE on multi course instruments is to do
with keeping the extreme courses within a reasonable span (it is, for
example, interesting that most 13 course lutes have significantly smaller
inter course separation than on 11 course instruments made around the same
time). With only 5 (or 6) courses the physical span of the extreme courses
is not an issue.
Having said this, it is clear that many extant early lutes (some of which
you note) do seem to have smaller inter course separation at the NUT; a
feature which, as you mention, we need to come to terms with. Do we know the
size of earlier hands? - were they smaller than present day (say, in
proprtion to overall height) or are they more indepedent (like inter-occular
distance which seems to have remained surprisingly constant inspite of
overall stature increase - I recall an overall figure of 15% increase from
16thC being quoted by Segerman). In short, do we need larger separation at
the nut because we have bigger/thicker fingers or because
Royal College Dias
I've just published a full version of the talk The Royal College Dias - guitar or vihuela? that I gave at the Lute Society meeting (16 April) including all the information I had to omit because of the time limit. Your views and opinions are always appreciated. http://www.vihuelademano.com/rcmdias.htm Alexander Batov www.vihuelademano.com -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Mudarra's bordon
- Original Message - From: Monica Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lex Eisenhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: vihuela vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 5:55 PM Subject: Mudarra's bordon Drones are more a feature of instruments capable of sustaining notes than plucked stringed instruments. From a slightly different perspective, it seems that if the early musicians / makers really wanted plucked string instruments to sound 'as with a drone' they would rather put _sympathetic_strings on them which, in a way, provide a drone-like after-sound whatever tonality of the piece played. Although there are no surviving guitars from the vihuelistas' days (aren't we that unlucky?), the guitar by Lorenzo Alonso (Madrid, 1786) has a small zither-like removable box inside with a set of chromatically tuned metal strings and another guitar by Rafael Vallego (Granada 1785) has an added set of strings over the soundboard. Who knows, maybe they took the idea from one of the 'oldies' ... hiding in bits and pieces on the loft ... On bowed instruments: lyre viol, hardingfele, viola d'amore, _sympathetic_ strings seem to have been provided for a similar purpose and could well be an offspring of much earlier traditions. Not does the interval of a fifth relate specifically to a drone. There are several pieces in LeRoy's Cinquiesme livre de guiterre which are a corde avallee. These are intabulations of songs and the lowered 4th course is necessary to fit the part writing onto the instrument. It is not used as a drone. There are also 4 fantasias in Fuenllana f.104v-106v in which the sixth course of the vihuela is to be tuned down a tone for the same reason. As you say Mudarra doesn't use the 4th course as a drone, so why should he refer to it as if it were one? The whole point of tuning down a tone is to extend the compass of the instrument. One of the pieces for a five-course mandore (Ulm Ms) is in a corde avallee, with a fifth (normally fourth) between the 4th and 5th courses. And it is nothing to do with a 'drone' of course. Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Antwort: Re: S. de Murcia
- Original Message - From: Garry Bryan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'VihuelaList' vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2005 2:32 PM Subject: RE: Antwort: Re: S. de Murcia ... Although, I have an eerie feeling that Alexander Batov is going to inform me shortly that there is evidence of a vihuela de mano with the same body dimensions of a bass viol :) . Not this time; I'll wait for a more appropriate occasion ;) To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: Batov workshop trip
Hello Matanya, Nice to hear from you again. Over the last few years I received and answered a number of enquires regarding those misterious vihuelas in the St-Petersburg collection. So I hope this posting can finally help to resolve the matter once and for all. To me, what seems to have happened here is just a tricky way in which our memory - perception mechanism works. Remembering is far from being a process of mechanical reproduction. Our visual impressions (in particularly brief ones) over prolonged period of time may quite easily be replaced with . imagination. Memory may actually re-shape the material recalled so as to make it, so to say, more suitable for the occasion. I personally prefer to have an image or description of the instruments that I've seen over the years so that my memory can't force me to follow along its imaginary routes. I don't know exactly when you had a chance to see the E.0748 vihuela for the first time (I suppose not before the end of 1998, when it was publicly announced as such by Joel Dugot). So there obviously was a considerable gap between this and your short glimpse at the vihuelas in the St-Petersburg collection (at least 7 - 8 years, please correct me if I'm not right). But what have probably played a decisive role in confusing the two instruments that you are quoting as vihuelas (Nos 787 and 424) is that they were listed as such in the Catalogue of musical instruments compiled by Blagodatov and published in 1972 (p.106). It is full of all sorts of mistakes and can only give a general outlook of the collection. In fact there are three instruments listed as vihuelas in there: Nos 787, 424 and 315, but in reality Nos 787 and 315 are battente guitars and No 424 is a vauled-back guitar (originally 5-course but converted to 6-string in the early 19th centrury). Curiously enough, Blagodatov lists No 790 as battente guitar, which in fact it is but not Nos 787 and 315! So he obviously had no clue as to what they all represent. I knew about this mistaken attribution (as did other makers and interested professionals) long before I was accepted to work in the collection as a restorer / conservator (in 1982 in fact) and to that time have made several 5-course vaulted-back guitars based on No 424. Symbolically enough, my first major conservation work in 1983 was carried out with No 787 battente guitar of which I have made a drawing and shared it with a number of researches who were enquiring the museum about battente guitars in there. One of those was a lady from Italy (if memory serves me right, her name is Valentina Ricetti) who made a major research on battente guitars and published the results in Liuteria magazine (I haven't got a copy at hand, but I suppose it was somewhere between 1984 - 86). I sent her detailed information on all three battente guitars (Nos 787, 315 and 790) and there was never any doubt that they can be attributed any differently. By the way, she did include some photographs of these guitars in her two-part publication. This is all really. More than the subject deserves! For those who need some visual proof to my words above, I'm going to upload some images of the two battente guitars (Nos 787 and 315) and vaulted-back guitar (No 424) from the St-Petersburg collection on www.vihuelademano.com/battente.htm (I'll let you know when I've done it, hopefully tomorrow). Unfortunately I do not have the images of No 790 with me at the moment. If anybody needs more detailed views of these instruments, do let me know. I do apologize for such a long posting. Regards, Alexander - Original Message - From: Matanya Ophee [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 5:40 PM Subject: Re: Batov workshop trip At 10:17 AM 2/15/2005, Alexander Batov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Only time and more indepth research (similar to the one which was undertaken with the E.0748 instrument by Musee de la Musique) Thank you Alexander for the opportunity to ask you directly, the same question I posted on the lute list some years back, and for which I was savaged and trashed, and continue to be savaged and trashed on his web site, by Sandy Barber. When you took me inside the collection of the Museum of Musical Instruments in Leningrad in 1990, you showed me two vihuelas, No. 787 and 424 in the Blagodatov catalog, which, to my untrained eyes, look exactly the same as the so called Chambure vihuela. At the time, you were the official restavrator of the museum. And here is the question: to what extant, these two vihuelas are really 16 century Spanish vihuelas, and did you, or anyone else, ever do any comparative analysis of these two instruments with the Chambure one? As I stated often, I have no axe to grind in this issue. I am not an instrument maker and I stand to gain nothing one way or the other. My only interest in this is purely academic, i.e., I want to know the truth, not someone's obvious commercial interest
Re: Batov workshop trip
- Original Message - From: Antonio Corona [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vihuela vihuela@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 6:12 AM Subject: Re: Batov workshop trip Dear Rob, I read with interest your account to A. Batov's workshop, and I should state, with all due respect, that I disagree with the identification of the Dias-based instruments as vihuelas. This is a subject on which I have already expressed my views on the lute-list, and my reasons for objection to such an identification are available on its archives. Dear Antonio, You are certainly entitled to express your opinion(s) but this is only your opinion and will continue to be so. The same applies to me. You perceive and understand things by bringing to bear upon your relevant knowledge, and in a similar way do I. As time goes on, more makers, researches etc can come up to their own ideas and conclusions about the matter. Perhaps somewhat different to yours and my. Only time and more indepth research (similar to the one which was undertaken with the E.0748 instrument by Musee de la Musique) can show who is closer to the truth. My opinion is that the Dias instrument in the RCM is a genuine 6-course vihuela with 1x1 + 2x5 arrangement of strings in courses. I, in turn, gave my reasons for this attribution of the Dias in the above mentioned discussion on the lute list, and in more details on my web site http://www.vihuelademano.com/vgcrossroads.htm While I don't intend to open again the can of worms, I nevertheless felt that I should let statements regarding the Dias guitar such as many agree that these instruments are suitable choices upon which to base the construction of a vihuela (only one luthier as far as I know of), or the questionable description of some instrument as Dias vihuela in E or Dias vihuela in A pass unnoticed. Again, it is questionable for you (and perhaps for some others) but not for everybody. Nobody have a monopoly on truth here. And nothing passes unnoticed, that's for sure! With best wishes, Antonio Regards, Alexander To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
